From "Physics is Your Friend":
Let's take that 400 FPS AEG again. V is 121m/s, and the BB weight is .2g, which is 0.0002 kilograms. So, Ke=(1/2)(.0002)(121)2 = 1.4641J. Remember how many of airsoft guns have power rated in joules? Well, now you know what it means. You can reverse the equation by doing v = sqrt((2*Ke)/m)). That way, you can replace the mass with a different BB weight (.00025kg for instance) and figure out how fast the gun will shoot with that BB.
Therefore if you wantt to max out at 1J the top velocity for a .25g BB is about 89m/s and for a .20g BB you're looking at around 100m/s.
3 comments:
some say the Second Amendment doesn't really permit everyone to own guns... actually, I'm one of those people... but that's not the point I want to make... handguns are one thing, assault weapons are another... outside the military, only terrorists and rampaging co-workers need them... scary that we'd let that ban lapse...
well, there are some who say that individuals aren't covered in the 2nd Amendment since we have the National Guard... but I've come to agree with the Department of Justice that "As developed in the analysis below, we conclude that the Second Amendment secures a personal right of individuals, not a collective right that may only be invoked by a State or a quasi-collective right restricted to those persons who serve in organized militia units."
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
As for assault weapsons, that ban was almost entirely superficial. I used to think that the ban was a good idea, but I read what the text of that ban said and I was astonished. First off, assault weapons are widely defined as "select-fire" or "automatic firing" firearms. These weapons have been heavily regulated well before Clinton's famous/infamous ban. You can Google "Class 3 weapon licenses" to learn more about them. Clinton's ban applied to semi-automatic weapons that were no more or less deadly than others which were not covered under the ban.
Thing is, there are many more crimes perpetrated by use of a handgun than an assault weapon (even those that were banned by Clinton's legislation). That's why it is more difficult to purchase a handgun than a rifle. Bans don't keep weapons out of the hands of the criminals anyhow. They do seriously put law abiding citizens at a disadvantage IMHO.
The more I've read the more I'm beginning to think that gun bans have very little to do improving crime rates. A lot of what I've seen actually proves just the opposite.
I've watched Bowling for Columbine many times and agree with Moore's conclusion that it isn't guns that are dangerous... it's mal-adjusted Americans and improper storage and handling of weapons that are the problem.
I consider gun ownership a great priviledge. Great men and women worked, sacrificed, and died to build this country... for all it's problems, it is a great country to call home.
What I think are really at stake here are our freedoms. Not just to hunt, protect ourselves, or collect guns, but for all of them.
I really do appreciate your comments. I'm still working out many of my own beliefs.
I found a great informational PDF available at:
http://www.awbansunset.com/awbguide.html
Post a Comment